bebotalk

Franchise owners don't really care, and seemingly the chain head offices don't care much either. Sometimes, high volumes in sales lead to cutting corners and not adhering to proper food preparation and safety standards. Otherwise, it is due to demotivated staff, or management who are disincentivised to follow thorough safety standards. Independent fast-food establishments can be just as bad, really.

It's how it works now. Law is imperfect. people don't always follows rules. Life is imperfect. And? It's always been that way. it doesn't mean that countries don't attempt to follow international law. The point then that both you and Leo state is moot. If international law is invalid, then why did Trump complain about European NATO countries not paying 2% of GDP on national defence, when the USA does? So the USA is following international law, isn't it, since NATO is a treaty and thus international law. What about the new NAFTA treaty he negotiated? Canada cannot arbitrarily deny an American citizen access to their country, under the treaty. Again, international law provides a framework but it doesn't mean there are perfect actors. Some people drive above speed limits. Some people burgle houses. Others might litter when there are explicit laws against it in their communities. Humans are imperfect and thus countries are such.

Who enters into international law? it's countries. Countries sign up to such in good faith. Militaries are arms of the state, and thus states abide by international law. Do they do it perfectly? Not always, no more than individuals follow criminal or civil law.

I disagree. Countries that are not aligned with the rules-based order that the West has established can and have been sidelined.

It should be the norm and standard. The West abandoned South Africa for apartheid. It does actively place sanctions on countries that abuse its people. If Israel is proven to be conducting genocide in Gaza, then it puts them in a difficult position.

Yes, hence why I said in small part, since it was and is a Jewish state. However, it is one of the few democracies in the region, so it is a counterweight to the other states somewhat.

How can AOC or others prove such? PM Bibi has never said he wants to kill all Palestinians. She also forgets that the USA has been a staunch ally of Israel since its founding. There are wider geo-political concerns. Would she want Bibi tried in the ICC?

His point is confusing. He's against term limits since they allow people to stay in power? then this makes term limits sound, right?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-68675654 Kind of tiresome and amusing also to see people say AI can never be a threat.

Zionism pre-dates WW1 and long before the rise of Nazi Germany.

Israel was created in small part as a Western bastion in the Middle East. But there is no firm evidence of genocide of yet. If there were, i'd imagine to save face that Israel would be sanctioned or punished.

I never said there is such. I merely stated that there is preliminary evidence that could point to it. Though I'd counter, how can you be sure there isn't?

Legally, genocide has little to do with immigration per se. It has to be the deliberate extermination of a group, by the UN charter. Some racist white Europeans calling it "genocdie" is just unintelligent/low IQ reasoning (ironic given Hitler's views) and a gross misunderstanding of what the UN ruling on genocide actually is.

Basic neurology makes men attracted to hot women. Moreover, it's also a status thing.

Friends don't barrack each other. Also, there is personal autonomy. Maybe in your church or temple, this isn't prescribed, but the works of some 1000 year old guru aren't really paramount to anything bar your congregation. People have prejudices, it's how it is. We don't live in a utopia but we can improve towards better things. If you think that people don't have bad views, and genuinely believe this, then you're either sheltered or aren't as "wise" as your prescribe. Or are dishonest in your condemnation and refutation of prejudice, or openly selective in condemning such.

what happens if you cite a prejudice (disliking hot women) in a friendship group where some others are homophobic? if they shout you down for your "bad views", what should one do?

Google is a made-up word. And? looool. is that even an argument?? There is little wrong in accepting that sex is part of life and shouldn't be hidden. Most socially conservative societies are highly hypocritical about it as it stands. One can look at how anti-gay pastors in the USA are caught fucking men. Dubai princes do the most haram stuff and get Western prostitutes to literally shit on their chests. Catholic priests in the medieval period often would screw nuns in their monasteries and get them pregnant. It's best to be open about sex, and realise that it's fine whilst having responsibilities attached.

your temple as a child told you you're "special". lol. it's amusing you cannot handle a different view.

No more morally bereft than the fast food industry. At least humans are aggressive and we have to take measures to defend ourselves whether collectively or individually. Nobody needs to eat fast food and the only reason fast food exists is because we tend to eat more for pleasure than nutrition. Or such foods were invented when there was no real knowledge of nutrition. An IT worker is also "immoral" since how the raw materials for microchips and processors often contain harm. There probably aren't many industries that are harm-free in some capacity. A drug a doctor prescribes might have been tested on animals, for instance.

the temple told you you're universally loveable, no matter what you do. lol

I'm surprised that even to this day, people still don't get Easter is more important than Christmas. Even some Christians don't realise this! There is a reason why the cross is the Christian symbol. That's why Jesus came to Earth. Yes, there would be no Easter without Christmas, but Jesus's purpose wasn't just to be born.

Your thoughts are oddly stated. I guess this is edgelord English, driven by a pastor or some other unintelligent and blinded person in one's youth. Tell me "you don't know me!!" did you pastor tell you you're that special, since it's not a common belief.

Leave it on the floor.

As a general rule, people don't care if they annoy you. Though if it's intentional, then yes, one should care. However, you'd cite some 1000-year-old guru's beliefs as gospel and the absolute truth, without realising there are different views in life. And me stating that people don't need to necessarily care about your feeling might trigger you, since your inner ego cannot handle it. I wasn't raised to be fearful of people and most aren't. I'd take the value my parents instilled in me rather than some crap one learnt in a temple based on the seeeminglhy "inviolable" values of said long-dead and retarded guru.

But you said BDSM was a mental illness, when it's clearly not stated as such in any medical text. I guess you make up conditions in your head. You shapw the world as how you want it to be, and actually think it is. I guess that's the spirtualist norm!